Systems and methods for automated retrofitting of customized code objects

ABSTRACT

The present application is directed towards systems and methods for automatic retrofitting of customized code objects during transformation of a system from a source installation to a target installation. In many instances, new objects may be created or objects modified on an online or production system while a development system is being upgraded. Simply copying the upgraded development system to the production system when complete would delete these new objects or modifications. Accordingly, the modifications or new objects may need to be retrofitted, or propagated to the development system and upgraded or transformed for compatibility with the new software, prior to placing the system online.

FIELD OF THE DISCLOSURE

The present application generally relates to analyzing, upgrading, andmodernizing an application. In particular, the present applicationrelates to systems and methods for automatically retrofitting customcode objects during transformation of a system from a sourceinstallation to a target installation.

BACKGROUND OF THE DISCLOSURE

Many software applications may be modified or customized by users oradministrators to include additional functions, objects, databases, andcustomized code. When the underlying software application is upgraded toa new version, in many instances, the modified or customized functions,objects, databases, and code of the prior, obsolete version may beincompatible with the new version. Rewriting the modified or customizedfunctions, objects, databases, and/or code may be time consuming andexpensive.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE FIGURES

The details, objects, aspects, features, and advantages of variousembodiments of the invention are set forth in the description below andaccompanying drawings, in which:

FIG. 1A is a block diagram of an embodiment of a network environment fora client to access a server for analyzing and transforming anapplication from a source installation to a target installation;

FIG. 1B is a block diagram of an embodiment of a computing device;

FIG. 2A is a block diagram of an embodiment of a suite of applicationsfor analyzing and transforming an application from a source installationto a target installation;

FIG. 2B is a block diagram of an embodiment of an appliance foranalyzing and transforming an application from a source installation toa target installation;

FIG. 2C is block diagram of another embodiment of an appliance foranalyzing and transforming an application from a source installation toa target installation;

FIG. 2D is a block diagram of an embodiment of an analysis andtransformation of a source installation into a target installation;

FIG. 2E is a block diagram of an embodiment of a transformation process;

FIGS. 3A-B is a flow chart of an embodiment of a method of analyzing andtransforming an application from a source installation to a targetinstallation;

FIG. 4A is an illustration of examples of timelines of a source andtarget installation during upgrade, according to one implementation;

FIG. 4B is a block diagram of an implementation of a system forautomated retrofitting of customized code objects;

FIG. 4C is a flow chart of an implementation of a method for automatedretrofitting of customized code objects; and

FIG. 4D is an example of a user interface or report for animplementation of automated retrofitting of customized code objects.

The features and advantages of the present invention will become moreapparent from the detailed description set forth below when taken inconjunction with the drawings, in which like reference charactersidentify corresponding elements throughout. In the drawings, likereference numbers generally indicate identical, functionally similar,and/or structurally similar elements.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The present application is directed towards systems and methods forautomated retrofitting of customized code objects during system upgradefrom a source installation to a target installation. The class ofsoftware systems and corresponding market segment referred to asEnterprise Resource Planning (ERP) is characterized by systems andapplications of extremely large breadth and scope of functionality,designed to coordinate, control, and support resources and informationrelated to business processes such as manufacturing, supply chainmanagement, financials, projects, human resources and customerrelationship management from a shared data store for an entireenterprise. The inherently large scope and complexity of ERP systemsposes significant challenges to modernization. Business owners mustbalance significant business and technical benefits of updating andmodernizing these vast systems against the considerable costs, risks,and disruption associated with large-scale modernization projections.

One example of an ERP system is the Systems, Applications, and Products(SAP) system developed by SAP AG of Walldorf, Germany. SAP uses aproprietary system architecture and programming language, the AdvancedBusiness Application Programming (ABAP) language, which includes theconcept of Logical Databases (LDBs). SAP is prominent in the market, andthis has spawned an industry sub-niche for providers of specializedservices and solutions related to SAP systems. Services and solutionsserving the SAP ERP market segment must be extremely knowledgeableabout, and closely aligned with, the underlying framework, architecture,and programming language of SAP systems, from both technical andbusiness perspectives. The SAP ERP environment allows customers andconsultants to develop customized code, objects, reports, and interfacesfor specific business requirements.

ERP systems may be highly customized, with code objects, executables,resources, and libraries developed on an installation-specific basis toperform various functions needed by the company. For example, onecompany's programmers may create modules for field sales agents to enterinvoices and manage product distribution to customers directly. Anothercompany may not have field sales agents and have no need for such afunction, but instead create a module to manage worldwide shippingmanifests between production sites.

Upgrading ERP systems may be time consuming and expensive, both due toupgrading the base installation to a new software version and thenensuring that customized code objects are still compatible, andmodifying those that are not. Automated systems for performingtransformation of code objects from a source installation to a targetinstallation, such as those discussed below in section B, may beutilized. However, transformation of the system may still take time.While some companies may be able to disable their ERP systems or takethem off line during upgrades, other companies are not, as doing so mayrequire stopping worldwide business operations. Accordingly, manycompanies run development and production systems in parallel, or have anexecuting, in-use, or online system, and a separate development oroff-line system for performing upgrades, testing code, etc. The systemsmay be periodically swapped, or, after upgrading, the development systemmay be copied to the production system, and operations may be resumedwith minimal interference. Thus, at a pre-upgrade point, the developmentsystem and production system may be identical, and may be referred to asinstances of a source installation. The systems may be upgraded ortransformed to a target installation, such as by transforming thedevelopment system and then copying the resulting transformed instanceto the production system.

In many instances, new objects may be created or objects modified on theonline or production system while the development system is beingupgraded. Simply copying the upgraded development system to theproduction system when complete would delete these new objects ormodifications. Accordingly, the modifications or new objects may need tobe retrofitted, or propagated to the development system and upgraded ortransformed for compatibility with the new software, prior to placingthe system online. The systems and methods described herein provide forautomated retrofitting of new and modified code objects duringtransformation of the system from a source installation to a targetinstallation.

For purposes of reading the description of the various embodimentsbelow, the following descriptions of the sections of the specificationand their respective contents may be helpful:

-   -   Section A describes a network environment and computing        environment which may be useful for practicing embodiments        described herein;    -   Section B describes embodiments of systems and methods for        analyzing and transforming an application from a source        installation to a target installation; and    -   Section C describes embodiments of systems and methods for        automated retrofitting of customized code objects during        transformation.

A. Network and Computing Environment

Prior to discussing the specifics of embodiments of the systems andmethods of the solution of the present disclosure, it may be helpful todiscuss the network and computing environments in which such embodimentsmay be deployed. Referring now to FIG. 1A, an embodiment of a networkenvironment 101 is depicted. In brief overview, the network environment101 comprises one or more systems 202-206 in communication with one ormore clients 208-210 (also generally referred to as remote machine(s)106) via one or more networks 104. Specifically shown are a bridgesystem 202, a source system 204, a target system 206, an analyzer client208, and a configuration client 210. In some embodiments, analyzerclient 208 and configuration client 210 may be the same client. In otherembodiments, bridge system 202 may be combined with analyzer client 208and/or configuration client 210. In yet another embodiment, bridgesystem 202 may be combined with either source system 204 or targetsystem 206. In some embodiments, a client 208-210 communicates with aserver 202-206 via an intermediary appliance (not shown), such as afirewall, a switch, a hub, a NAT, a proxy, a performance enhancingproxy, a network accelerator, a modem, or other network device of anyform or type.

As shown in FIG. 1A, the network 104 can be a local-area network (LAN),such as a company Intranet, a metropolitan area network (MAN), or a widearea network (WAN), such as the Internet or the World Wide Web. Althoughnot illustrated, network 104 may comprise one or more networks, coupledeither directly or via one or more intermediaries. In one embodiment,network 104 may be a private network. In another embodiment, network 104may be a public network. In some embodiments, network 104 may be acombination of one or more private networks and one or more publicnetworks. In some embodiments, clients 208-210 may be located at abranch office of a corporate enterprise communicating via a WANconnection over the network 104 to the systems 202-206 located at acorporate data center.

The network 104 may be any type and/or form of network and may includeany of the following: a point to point network, a broadcast network, awide area network, a local area network, a telecommunications network, adata communication network, a computer network, an ATM (AsynchronousTransfer Mode) network, a SONET (Synchronous Optical Network) network, aSDH (Synchronous Digital Hierarchy) network, a wireless network and awireline network. In some embodiments, the network 104 may comprise awireless link, such as an infrared channel or satellite band. Thetopology of the network 104 may be a bus, star, or ring networktopology. The network 104 and network topology may be of any suchnetwork or network topology as known to those ordinarily skilled in theart capable of supporting the operations described herein.

As shown in FIG. 1A, bridge system 202 may be a server or workstation,configured to include a solution manager 212 and/or a collection agent214, discussed in more detail below. As discussed above, althoughillustrated as a separate entity, bridge system 202 may be part of orcombined with either or both of analyzer client 208 and configurationclient 210.

Source system 204 may also be referred to as a source installation 204.In some embodiments, source system or source installation 204 maycomprise a server or workstation with an installation or configurationof a version of one or more applications. In one embodiment, the one ormore applications may also include an operating system. In anotherembodiment, the one or more applications may comprise an enterpriseresource planning (ERP) software, such as SAP Business Suite, SAP R/3,or SAP High-Performance Analytic Appliance (HANA), manufactured by SAPAG of Walldorf, Germany; Microsoft Dynamics, manufactured by MicrosoftCorporation of Redmond, Wash.; PeopleSoft, manufactured by OracleCorporation of Redwood Shores, Calif.; or any other type and form ofenterprise or manufacturing resource planning software. In anotherembodiment, the one or more applications may comprise any applicationthat comprises an installation in a predetermined state, andmodifications to objects from the predetermined state. In an example ofsuch an embodiment, a default installation of an ERP application may beinstalled on source installation 204. To account for specific needs ofthe business or industry, the installation may be modified, with customobjects, code, or functions for performing additional tasks or managingadditional resources not foreseen by the manufacturer of the ERPapplication. In another embodiment, the source system or sourceinstallation may comprise any type or form of application containingmodifications from an initial or default state.

An installation in a predetermined state may comprise any type and formof version, installation and/or state of configuration, modernization orcustomization of the same at any point during development, deployment ormaintenance of the application. In some embodiments, the predeterminedstate may be an initial or default installation of an application. Insome embodiments, the predetermined state may be the initial or defaultinstallation of a version of an application with a set of one or moreconfigurations, customizations or extensions. In some embodiments, thepredetermined state may be any version of an application with a set ofone or more configurations, customizations or extensions. In otherembodiments, the predetermined state may be any version that has beenupgraded or transformed using any of the systems and methods describedherein. In some embodiments, the predetermined state may be any point ofconfiguration or customization of a version of an application, whethercomplete, in-process or otherwise. For example, a predetermined state ofan application may be any set point in development, configuration orcustomization of an application. For example, the systems and methodsdescribed herein may be used to transform the configuration orcustomization during the development phases before the finalcustomizations or configurations are deployed for production.

Target system 206 may also be referred to as a target installation 206.In some embodiments, target system or target installation 206 maycomprise a server or workstation with an installation or configurationof a second version of one or more applications. In some embodiments,the second version may be similar to the first version of one or moreapplications on source system 204. As described above, source system 204may comprise custom objects, codes or functions. Using the methods andsystems described herein, target system 206 may be efficiently modifiedto comprise the custom objects, codes or functions of source system 204.In some embodiments, target system 206 may comprise additionalmodifications to allow the custom objects, codes or functions to executeor interact properly with the second version of the one or moreapplications. For example, a company with an existing source system 204may wish to upgrade to a new version of an underlying application on atarget system 206. The existing source system 204 may have modificationsand custom objects that the company wishes to include on target system206. In some embodiments, custom objects and code may be directlytransferred and will perform without error on target system 206.However, in many embodiments, the custom objects and code may needfurther modifications, due to differences between the underlyingapplication of target system 206 and source system 204.

Also shown in FIG. 1A are analyzer client 208 and configuration client210. Although shown as separate clients, in some embodiments, analyzerclient 208 and configuration client 210 may be combined, and/or may becombined with bridge system 202. Analyzer client 208 and configurationclient 210 may each be a workstation, client, or server. In someembodiments, analyzer client 208 is configured with or executes ananalysis agent 228 and/or transformer 230, described in more detailbelow. In some embodiments, configuration client 210 is configured withor executes a configuration agent 232 and/or a manual conversion agent234, described in more detail below.

The bridge system 202, source system 204, target system 206, analyzerclient 208 and configuration client 210 may be deployed as and/orexecuted on any type and form of computing device, such as a computer,network device or appliance capable of communicating on any type andform of network and performing the operations described herein.Furthermore, although only one each of systems 202-210 are illustrated,in many embodiments, the systems may each comprise one or more physicaland/or virtual machines, such as a server cloud, server farm, cloud ofvirtual machines executed by one or more physical machines, etc.

FIG. 1B is a block diagram of an exemplary computing device useful forpracticing the methods and systems described herein. The various devicesand servers may be deployed as and/or executed on any type and form ofcomputing device, such as a computer, network device or appliancecapable of communicating on any type and form of network and performingthe operations described herein. The computing device may comprise alaptop computer, desktop computer, virtual machine executed by aphysical computer, tablet computer, such as an iPad tablet manufacturedby Apple Inc. or Android-based tablet such as those manufactured bySamsung, Inc. or Motorola, Inc., smart phone or PDA such as aniPhone-brand/iOS-based smart phone manufactured by Apple Inc.,Android-based smart phone such as a Samsung Galaxy or HTC Droid smartphone, or any other type and form of computing device. FIG. 1B depicts ablock diagram of a computing device 150 useful for practicing anembodiment of the bridge system 202, source system 204, target system206, analyzer client 208, or configuration client 210. A computingdevice 150 may include a central processing unit 151; a main memory unit152; a visual display device 174; one or more input/output devices 179a-179 b (generally referred to using reference numeral 179), such as akeyboard 176, which may be a virtual keyboard or a physical keyboard,and/or a pointing device 177, such as a mouse, touchpad, or capacitiveor resistive single- or multi-touch input device; and a cache memory(not illustrated) in communication with the central processing unit 151,which may be connected via a bus 175.

The central processing unit 151 is any logic circuitry that responds toand processes instructions fetched from the main memory unit 152 and/orstorage 178. The central processing unit may be provided by amicroprocessor unit, such as: those manufactured by Intel Corporation ofSanta Clara, Calif.; those manufactured by Motorola Corporation ofSchaumburg, Ill.; those manufactured by Apple Inc. of Cupertino Calif.,or any other single- or multi-core processor, or any other processorcapable of operating as described herein, or a combination of two ormore single- or multi-core processors. Main memory unit 152 may be oneor more memory chips capable of storing data and allowing any storagelocation to be directly accessed by the microprocessor 151, such asrandom access memory (RAM) of any type. In some embodiments, main memoryunit 152 may include cache memory or other types of memory.

The computing device 150 may support any suitable installation device166, such as a floppy disk drive, a CD-ROM drive, a CD-R/RW drive, aDVD-ROM drive, tape drives of various formats, USB/Flash devices, ahard-drive or any other device suitable for installing software andprograms such as a social media application or presentation engine, orportion thereof. The computing device 150 may further comprise a storagedevice 178, such as one or more hard disk drives or redundant arrays ofindependent disks, for storing an operating system and other relatedsoftware, and for storing application software programs such as anyprogram related to the social media application or presentation engine.

Furthermore, the computing device 150 may include a network interface168 to interface to a Local Area Network (LAN), Wide Area Network (WAN)or the Internet through a variety of connections including, but notlimited to, standard telephone lines, LAN or WAN links (e.g., Ethernet,T1, T3, 56 kb, X.25), broadband connections (e.g., ISDN, Frame Relay,ATM), wireless connections, (802.11a/b/g/n/ac, BlueTooth), cellularconnections, or some combination of any or all of the above. The networkinterface 168 may comprise a built-in network adapter, network interfacecard, PCMCIA network card, card bus network adapter, wireless networkadapter, USB network adapter, cellular modem or any other devicesuitable for interfacing the computing device 150 to any type of networkcapable of communication and performing the operations described herein.

A wide variety of I/O devices 179 a-179 n may be present in thecomputing device 150. Input devices include keyboards, mice, trackpads,trackballs, microphones, drawing tablets, and single- or multi-touchscreens. Output devices include video displays, speakers, headphones,inkjet printers, laser printers, and dye-sublimation printers. The I/Odevices 179 may be controlled by an I/O controller 173 as shown in FIG.1B. The I/O controller may control one or more I/O devices such as akeyboard 176 and a pointing device 177, e.g., a mouse, optical pen, ormulti-touch screen. Furthermore, an I/O device may also provide storage178 and/or an installation medium 166 for the computing device 150. Thecomputing device 150 may provide USB connections to receive handheld USBstorage devices such as the USB Flash Drive line of devices manufacturedby Twintech Industry, Inc. of Los Alamitos, Calif.

The computing device 150 may comprise or be connected to multipledisplay devices 174 a-174 n, which each may be of the same or differenttype and/or form. As such, any of the I/O devices 179 a-179 n and/or theI/O controller 173 may comprise any type and/or form of suitablehardware, software embodied on a tangible medium, or combination ofhardware and software to support, enable or provide for the connectionand use of multiple display devices 174 a-174 n by the computing device150. For example, the computing device 150 may include any type and/orform of video adapter, video card, driver, and/or library to interface,communicate, connect or otherwise use the display devices 174 a-174 n. Avideo adapter may comprise multiple connectors to interface to multipledisplay devices 174 a-174 n. The computing device 150 may includemultiple video adapters, with each video adapter connected to one ormore of the display devices 174 a-174 n. Any portion of the operatingsystem of the computing device 150 may be configured for using multipledisplays 174 a-174 n. Additionally, one or more of the display devices174 a-174 n may be provided by one or more other computing devices, suchas computing devices 150 a and 150 b connected to the computing device150, for example, via a network. These embodiments may include any typeof software embodied on a tangible medium designed and constructed touse another computer's display device as a second display device 174 afor the computing device 150. One ordinarily skilled in the art willrecognize and appreciate the various ways and embodiments that acomputing device 150 may be configured to have multiple display devices174 a-174 n.

A computing device 150 of the sort depicted in FIG. 1B typicallyoperates under the control of an operating system, such as any of theversions of the Microsoft® Windows operating systems, the differentreleases of the Unix and Linux operating systems, any version of the MacOS® for Macintosh computers, any embedded operating system, anyreal-time operating system, any open source operating system, anyproprietary operating system, any operating systems for mobile computingdevices, or any other operating system capable of running on thecomputing device and performing the operations described herein.

The computing device 150 may have different processors, operatingsystems, and input devices consistent with the device. For example, inone embodiment, the computer 150 is an Apple iPhone or Motorola Droidsmart phone, or an Apple iPad or Samsung Galaxy Tab tablet computer,incorporating multi-input touch screens. Moreover, the computing device150 can be any workstation, desktop computer, laptop or notebookcomputer, server, handheld computer, mobile telephone, any othercomputer, or other form of computing or telecommunications device thatis capable of communication and that has sufficient processor power andmemory capacity to perform the operations described herein.

In some embodiments, a first computing device 100 a executes anapplication on behalf of a user of a client computing device 100 b. Inother embodiments, a computing device 100 a executes a virtual machine,which provides an execution session within which applications execute onbehalf of a user or a client computing devices 100 b. In one of theseembodiments, the execution session is a hosted desktop session. Inanother of these embodiments, the computing device 100 executes aterminal services session. The terminal services session may provide ahosted desktop environment. In still another of these embodiments, theexecution session provides access to a computing environment, which maycomprise one or more of: an application, a plurality of applications, adesktop application, and a desktop session in which one or moreapplications may execute.

B. Systems and Methods for Analyzing and Transforming an Applicationfrom a Source Installation to a Target Installation

FIG. 2A illustrates a block diagram of an embodiment of a suite ofapplications and data types for analyzing and transforming anapplication from a source installation to a target installation. Inbrief, FIG. 2A shows a source code optimizer 180, source code translator181, source code generator 182, test support engine 183, a data typeconverter 184, agents for data conversion 185 and data migration 186,and documentation 187. Together, blocks 180-187 comprise agents oftransformer 230. Similarly, statistics data 188, analysis engine 189,configuration agent 190 and interface business rules 191 comprise agentsof analysis agent 228. Meta-model 192 interacts with both the analysisagent 228 and transformer 230, and is established by parser engine 193.Additional data types are available, such as database information 194,source code 195, screen information 196, and business purposeinformation 197.

Shown in FIG. 2B is a block diagram of another embodiment of a systemfor analyzing and transforming an application from a source installationto a target installation. In brief, bridge system 202 may be configuredwith a solution manager 212, which may include a collection agent 214and may be configured with a remote function call (RFC) user account216A and a dialog user account 218A. Source system 204 may be configuredwith a source installation 220, which may include a collection plug-in222A. Source installation 220 may also be configured with an RFC useraccount 216B and a dialog user account 218B. Target system 206 may beconfigured with a target installation 224, which may include acollection plug-in 222B. Target installation 220 may also be configuredwith an RFC user account 216C, a dialog user account 218C, and a tooluser account 226. As shown, analyzer client 208 may be configured withan analysis agent 228 and a transformer 230. Configuration client 210may be configured with a configuration agent 232 and a manual conversionagent 234. In one embodiment, the collection agent 214 is able tocommunicate with collection plug-ins 222A and 222B via a network 104. Asshown, in some embodiments, analysis agent 228 and transformer 230 maybe configured to use RFC user accounts 216A-216C for communicating withsystems 202-206. Transformer 230 may also be configured to use tool useraccount 226. Additionally, in some embodiments, configuration agent 232and manual conversion agent 234 may be configured to use dialog useraccounts 218A-218C.

Still referring to FIG. 2B and in more detail, in some embodiments,bridge system 202 may be configured with or may execute a solutionmanager 212. In some embodiments, solution manager 212 may be anapplication, process, agent, function, routine, logic, or any type andform of executable instructions for snapshotting an installation. Insome embodiments, snapshotting or providing a snapshot of aninstallation comprises scanning and downloading components and/orassociations of an installation of an application, such as sourceinstallation 220. Snapshotting may also be referred to variously assaving, capturing, imaging, or storing an image, copy or an instance ofan installation. In additional embodiments, solution manager 212 mayfurther comprise functions for compressing a snapshotted image. In stillfurther embodiments, solution manager 212 may comprise or be associatedwith a storage medium capable of storing a snapshotted image. In oneembodiment, solution manager 212 may connect via a network to a sourceinstallation 220, described in more detail below. The solution manager212 may create a local copy of the entire source installation 220, or,in some embodiments, may parse the source installation 220 and copy aselected subset of the installation. For example, in one suchembodiment, solution manager 212 may parse the source installation 220for custom objects or code modified from a predetermined state of thesource installation, and store only a copy of the custom objects orcode. In another such embodiment, solution manager 212 may determine adifference between source installation 220 and target installation 224and store only the difference.

In many embodiments, solution manager 212 further comprisesfunctionality for identifying an object as being in a predeterminedstate or being in a modified state. For example, an object that has notbeen customized may, in some embodiments, be considered to be in apredetermined state. A predetermined state of an installation, in suchembodiments, may be the state of the installation prior to customizationor addition of custom objects, functions, or code. In furtherembodiments, solution manager 212 may comprise functionality foridentifying an object as an asset within-scope, such as a program, adatabase, or a screen, or an asset out-of-scope, such as atask-management system, a scheduler, an interface, a peripheral system,or a development environment. In yet further embodiments, solutionmanager 212 may comprise functionality for storing the identification ofobjects in a database, index, or list, which may be referred to as aworklist. In some embodiments, this worklist may be sent to the analyzerclient 208, described in more detail below.

In many embodiments, solution manager 212 further comprisesfunctionality for checking an object or code for compliance with alanguage syntax 282 and/or semantic rules 284. For example, an object orcode modified with custom programming may no longer be compliant with astandard syntax. In such a case, solution manager 212 may identify theobject as being not in compliance. In another embodiment, an object orcode may be modified, but still be compliant with a standard syntax. Insuch a case, solution manager 212 may identify the object as beingcompliant.

In some embodiments, as shown in FIG. 2B, solution manager 212 maycomprise or include a collection agent 214. Collection agent 214 may bean application, process, agent, function, routine, logic, or any typeand form of executable instructions for downloading or copying all orpart of a source installation 220 to bridge system 202. In someembodiments, collection agent 214 connects via a network to a collectionplugin 222A and/or collection plugin 222B, described in more detailbelow. Collection agent 214 may, in some embodiments, comprise functionsfor downloading source installation data as described above. In furtherembodiments, collection agent 214 and collection plugins 222A and 222Bmay be a standard application type or comply with a standard applicationtype and be executed by the source installation 220 and/or targetinstallation 224 without necessary modifications.

As shown in FIG. 2B, solution manager 212, source installation 220 andtarget installation 224 may include user accounts, such as RemoteFunction Call (RFC) users 216A-216C, Dialog users 218A-218C, and Tooluser 226. RFC users 216A-216C (referred to generally as RFC user(s) 216)may be an account with authentication features, such as a login name andpassword or other security methods, and privileges allowing the accountto get data from and insert data into source installation 220 and/ortarget installation 224. In some embodiments, data inserted or retrievedfrom an installation may comprise objects, code, or functions. In someembodiments, RFC users 216 may also be referred to as System orCommunication users. Additionally, while referred to generally as RFCusers, in many implementations, user accounts may communicate with thesource installation, target installation, bridge systems, or otherdevices via an RFC protocol, via JavaScript Object Notation (JSON),Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP), a Representational State Transfer(REST) application programming interface (API), via an exchange of XMLdata, or any other type and form of communication interface. In furtherembodiments, the Dialog users 218A-218C (referred to generally as Dialoguser(s) 218) may be an account with authentication features, similar tothose mentioned with regard to RFC users 216, and privileges allowingthe account to interact with programs and functions of sourceinstallation 220 and/or target installation 224. In some embodiments, adialog user 218 may have fewer privileges or more limited access than anRFC user 216. In additional embodiments, the Tool user 226 may be anaccount with authentication features, similar to those mentioned withregard to RFC users 216 and Dialog users 218, and privileges allowingthe account to use modification tools on target installation 224.

As shown in FIG. 2B, source system 204 may comprise a sourceinstallation 220. As discussed above, in connection with the discussionof source system 204, source installation 220 may be an installation orconfiguration of a version of one or more applications. In oneembodiment, the one or more applications may comprise an enterpriseresource planning (ERP) software, such as SAP Business Suite or SAP R/3,manufactured by SAP AG of Walldorf, Germany; Microsoft Dynamics,manufactured by Microsoft Corporation of Redmond, Wash.; PeopleSoft,manufactured by Oracle Corporation of Redwood Shores, Calif.; or anyother type and form of enterprise or manufacturing resource planningsoftware. In another embodiment, the one or more applications maycomprise any application that comprises a default or initialinstallation in a predetermined state, and modifications to objects fromthe default state. In yet another embodiment, the source system orsource installation may comprise any type or form of applicationcontaining modifications from an initial or default state. As shown,source installation 220 may include one or more RFC users 216 and/ordialog users 218, discussed above.

Additionally, source installation 220 may include or be configured witha collection plugin 222A (generally referred to as a collection plugin222). Collection plugins 222 may comprise logic, services, hookingfunctions, routines, or any other type and form of function forgathering data of an installation, such as source installation 220 ortarget installation 224. In some embodiments, collection plugins 222 mayfurther comprise functions for snapshotting or recording an image of aninstallation as the installation exists at a certain point in time. Insome embodiments, collection plugins 222 may include the ability to pushdata over a network to collection agent 214, while in other embodiments,collection agent 214 may pull data from the collection plugins.

Target system 206 may comprise a target installation 224. As discussedabove, in connection with the discussion of target system 206, targetinstallation 224 may be an installation or configuration of a second orsubsequent version of one or more applications, such as a versionsimilar to but different from a previous version of one or moreapplications on source system 204. As described above, sourceinstallation 220 may comprise custom objects, codes or functions. Usingthe methods and systems described herein, target installation 224 may beefficiently modified to comprise the custom objects, codes or functionsof source installation 220. In some embodiments, target installation 224may comprise additional modifications to allow the custom objects, codesor functions to execute or interact properly with the second version ofthe one or more applications. As shown, in some embodiments, targetinstallation 224 may include or comprise a collection plugin 222B, andmay include or be configured with accounts for RFC User 216C, DialogUser 218C, and Tool user 226, discussed above.

As shown, analyzer client 208 may comprise or include an analysis agent228 and/or a transformer 230. Analysis agent 228 may comprise one ormore applications, logic, functions, services, routines or executableinstructions of any type or form, for parsing a first and/or a secondinstallation of an application and creating a meta-model, described inmore detail below. In some embodiments, analysis agent 228 comprisesfunctions for downloading system objects identified by the solutionmanager 212 for transformation. In additional embodiments, analysisagent 228 comprises functions for parsing the source code of programs,databases, screens, task management systems, schedulers, interfaces,peripheral systems, development environments, and other libraries forkeywords, functions, objects, or code corresponding to a definedlanguage and syntax. In further embodiments, analyzer client 208 maycomprise functions for detecting syntax and language violations. In onesuch embodiment, analyzer client 208 may comprise functions tocategorize or identify the object, responsive to detected violations, asavailable for automatic upgrade, semi-automatic upgrade, or manualupgrade. In an additional embodiment, analyzer client 208 may comprisefunctionality for presenting the categorized objects and/or meta-modelto a user or administrator. In some such embodiments, presenting theobjects and or meta-model may comprise creating and presenting a report,and may include analysis of severity of required upgrades, expectedprocessing time, percentage of upgrade that may be performedautomatically, and/or cost to perform upgrading of the sourceinstallation.

In some of the embodiments described herein, a system or method may bedescribed as automatic, semi-automatic or manual. An automatic system ormethod may be such a system or method that performs any of the upgrades,transformations or conversion described herein without any user inputduring the upgrade, transformation or conversion or with a level of userinput below a predetermined threshold. A semi-automatic system or methodmay be such a system or method that performs any of the upgrades,transformations or conversion described herein with combination of alevel of automation and a level of user input during the upgrade,transformation or conversion below a predetermined threshold or within apredetermined threshold range. A manual system or method may be such asystem or method that performs any of the upgrades, transformations orconversion described herein without automation during the upgrade,transformation or conversion or with a level of automation below apredetermined threshold. In addition, in the description herein, objectsor code of a system may be referred to as comprising automatic code;comprising semi-automatic code; or comprising manual code. Similar tothe systems and methods described above, automatic code may be upgraded,transformed or converted without any user input during the upgrade,transformation, or conversion. Semi-automatic code may be upgraded,transformed or converted with a combination of a level of automation anda level of user input during the upgrade, transformation, or conversionbelow a predetermined threshold or within a predetermined thresholdrange. Manual code may be upgraded, transformed, or converted withoutautomation during the upgrade, transformation or conversion or with alevel of automation below a predetermined threshold.

Transformer 230 may comprise one or more applications, logic, functions,services, routines or executable instructions of any type or form, fortransforming a meta-model from one corresponding to one installation ofan application, to one corresponding to another installation of anapplication, such as between a first and second or subsequentinstallation of the application. In some embodiments, transforming ameta-model comprises applying rules for modifying an object from asyntax or code language associated with the first installation to asyntax or code language associated with the second installation. Forexample, in one embodiment, a first language may include a function forallowing text input into a database. The second language may include asimilar function, but add different possible text encodings, such asUnicode Transformation Format (UTF)-8 or punycode. In such anembodiment, the transformer 230 may apply a rule indicating to add adefault encoding type to the function. Thus, the object utilizing thefunction may then be used by the second installation with the secondlanguage and syntax. In some embodiments, transformer 230 furthercomprises functions for error checking transformed objects forcompliance with rules, language, and/or syntax standards. In anotherembodiment, transformer 230 further comprises functions for uploadingtransformed objects to target installation 224.

As shown, analysis agent 228 and transformer 230 may, in someembodiments, be configured to use RFC users 216A-216C on the solutionmanager 212, source installation 220, and target installation 224,respectively. This may enable analysis agent 228 and transformer 230 toretrieve and input data, code, and objects from and to these threesystems. In a further embodiment, transformer 230 may be configured touse tool user 226 on target installation 224. This may enabletransformer 230 to interact with system objects of the targetinstallation 224 that an RFC user may not be privileged to modify.

Also shown in FIG. 2B, configuration client 210 may, in someembodiments, comprise a configuration agent 232 and/or a manualconversion agent 234. In some embodiments, configuration agent 232 andmanual conversion agent 234 may be configured to use Dialog Users218A-218C, as shown. This may enable a user or administrator interactingwith configuration agent 232 and/or manual conversion agent 234 tofurther interact with solution manager 212, source installation 220,and/or target installation 224. In an embodiment not illustrated,configuration agent 232 and/or manual conversion agent 234 may alsocontrol or interact with analysis agent 228 and/or transformer 230 forthe purpose of modifying their settings.

Configuration agent 232 may comprise one or more applications, routines,services, functions or executable instructions of any form or type forconfiguring a rules engine 248, discussed in more detail below. In otherembodiments, configuration agent 232 may comprise functions forconfiguring solution manager 212, source installation 220, and/or targetinstallation 224. For example, in one such embodiment, configurationagent 232 may configure the solution manager 212 to only scan certaindatabases when snapshotting and categorizing objects.

Manual conversion agent 234 may comprise one or more applications,routines, services, functions or executable instructions of any form ortype for allowing a user or administrator to perform modifications toobjects categorized for semi-automatic or manual upgrade. In someembodiments, manual conversion agent 234 may present a dialog to a user,indicating the object to be upgraded, and a language or syntax issuethat could cause an error if the object is installed in targetinstallation 224. In some embodiments, manual conversion agent 234 mayalso present suggested modifications to the object, based on rulesapplied by the analysis agent 228. In further embodiments, manualconversion agent 234 may comprise functions for modifying the object,responsive to an instruction from the user. In a further embodiment,manual conversion agent 234 may comprise functions for uploading themodified object to target installation 224 and/or analyzer client 208.In one example embodiment, the manual conversion agent 234 may present adialog to a user indicating that an object of the source installation,when upgraded to the target installation, may perform an illegaloperation due to differences in syntax, such as dividing by a variablethat has been set to zero. The user may instruct the manual conversionagent 234 to make a modification, such as changing the value of thevariable, or directing the operation to a different variable.

Shown in FIG. 2C is another embodiment of a system for analyzing andtransforming an application from a source installation to a targetinstallation. In brief, source system 204 may comprise a sourceinstallation 220 and collection plugin, 222A, discussed above. Bridgesystem 202 may comprise a solution manager 212, discussed above, whichmay comprise an object analyzer 236, syntax checkers 238A-238B, unicodechecker 252 and post-processing agent 254. Analyzer client 208 maycomprise an analysis agent 228, which may further comprise a downloadengine 240 and an analysis engine 242. The analysis engine maycategorize code as automatic code 244A, semi-automatic code 244B, ormanual code 244C. Semi-automatic code 244B is passed to a rule engine246 configured on transformer 230. Rule engine 246 may apply rules tothe semi-automatic code 244B, and pass the code to conversion engine248. Automatic code 244A is passed from the analysis agent 228 to theconversion engine 248. Automatic code 244A and semi-automatic code 244Bare passed from the conversion engine 248 to the upload engine 250. Theupload engine 250 may upload converted automatic code 244A andsemi-automatic code 244B and unconverted manual code 244C to bridgesystem 202 and solution manager 212. Configuration client 210 maycomprise a configuration agent 232, which may configure rule engine 246of transformer 230, and a manual conversion agent 234, which mayinteract with post-processing agent 254 of solution manager 212.Although not shown, solution manager 212 may, in some embodiments,comprise an upload engine 250′ for transmitting processed and convertedcode to target installation 224 of target system 206.

Still referring to FIG. 2C and in more detail, solution manager 212 maybe configured with an object analyzer 236. In some embodiments, objectanalyzer 236 may comprise one or more applications, routines, services,functions or executable instructions of any form or type for analyzingan object obtained from collection plugin 222A. Although not shown,object analyzer 236 may further comprise functions for downloadingobjects identified by collection plugin 222A, such as a collection agent214 discussed above. Analyzing an object, as discussed above inconnection with solution manager 212, may comprise determining if theobject is compliant with a standard syntax and identifying the object,responsive to the determination, as compliant or non-compliant.Accordingly, and as shown, object analyzer 236 may interact with syntaxchecker 238A. In some embodiments, syntax checker 238A is a separateprocess, while in others, syntax checker 238A is a function orsubroutine of object analyzer 236. In still other embodiments, objectanalyzer 236 may be a function or subroutine of syntax checker 238A.

Syntax checker 238A may, in some embodiments, comprise one or moreapplications, routines, services, functions or executable instructionsof any form or type for comparing an object to a standard syntax. Insome embodiments, syntax checker 238A may comprise associated libraries,dictionaries, databases, or other data structures identifying syntax,functions, connectors, comments, instructions, code, or other objects ofone or more languages. For example, in one embodiment, syntax checker238A may include or be associated with a library defining objects in theAdvanced Business Application Programming (ABAP) designed by SAP AG ofWalldorf, Germany or using SAP HANA database artifacts. In anotherembodiment, syntax checker 238A may include a library defining objectsin Java, PHP, Python, Perl, SQL, or any other code language. In someembodiments, syntax checker 238A compares code within an objectidentified by or obtained from collection plugin 222A with code in thelibrary defining objects in a related language. In one exampleembodiment, syntax checker 238A receives an object from collectionplugin 222A that comprises a WRITE command. The syntax checker 238Acompares the object to a dictionary, which indicates that the WRITEcommand has been replaced by a WRITE TO command. Responsive to thiscomparison, the syntax checker 238A and/or object analyzer 236identifies the object as being non-compliant. In some embodiments, theidentification of an object as compliant or non-compliant may be in aseparate object, database, registry, or data structure, while in otherembodiments, the identification may be inserted into the object.

As shown, analysis agent 228 may include a download engine 240. Downloadengine 240 may comprise hardware and/or software components comprisingfunctions or executable instructions for downloading one or more objectsand/or identifications of objects as compliant or non-compliant fromsolution manager 212. In some embodiments, download engine 240 utilizesan RFC user account on solution manager 212 to download objects and/oridentifications, as discussed above.

Analysis engine 242 may, in some embodiments, comprise one or moreapplications, routines, services, functions or executable instructionsof any form or type for analyzing a capability of an object for upgradeto a target installation. For example, in one embodiment, an objectidentified as compliant with syntax of the language of the targetinstallation may be determined to be capable of automatic upgrading andbe identified as automatic code 244A. In one such embodiment, the objectmay need no modifications to be used by the target installation 224. Inanother such embodiment, the object may be identified as non-compliant,but need only minor modifications. For example, a comment indicator (″)used by the language of the source installation may be converted to acomment indicator (#) of the language the target installation withoutrequiring additional analysis. Similarly, a function that included novariables in the source installation, such as CLOSE may be converted toa function that includes optional variables in the target installation,such as CLOSE( ), without requiring additional analysis.

In another embodiment, analysis engine 242 may determine that anon-compliant object needs modifications that may be performedautomatically, but also needs modifications that require additionalinput, such as from a user or developer. This may be referred to assemi-automatic code. For example, in one embodiment, source installationobjects may include unicode characters, binary data, or a mix of binarydata. In one such embodiment, the target installation may include afunction that interacts with objects differently if they are binary orunicode. In such an embodiment, the analysis engine 242 may indicatethat some of the objects—those that are solely binary or unicode—may beconverted automatically, while objects that are mixed binary and unicodemay require a user to designate a mode. In such an embodiment, analysisengine 242 may indicate that the objects are semi-automatic code 244B.In another example, an object of the source installation may contain afunction that writes into a database. In one such embodiment, the targetinstallation may have more than one corresponding database. For example,source installation 220 may be a single user environment and have onlyone user database, while target installation 224 may be a multi-userenvironment. In some embodiments, the WRITE function may need to havemodifications that can be performed automatically, such as the additionof optional variables, or conversion to a WRITE TO statement, andmodifications that require input from a user, such as a path to aspecific directory or database in the multi-user environment of thetarget installation. Again, in such an embodiment, analysis engine 242may indicate that the objects are semi-automatic code 244B.

In another embodiment, analysis engine 242 may indicate that anon-compliant object may not be automatically or semi-automaticallyconverted to the language and/or syntax of the target installation 224,and may identify the object as manual code 244C. For example, a sourceinstallation object may use a function of the source installationlanguage that has been obsoleted or for which no corresponding functionexists in the target installation. In one such embodiment, the sourceinstallation object may read from a common memory. However, in thetarget installation, a common memory may have been replaced by isolatedmemory for privacy and security reasons. Accordingly, a READ COMMONfunction may be obsolete. Upgrading the function or an object using thefunction may, in such an embodiment, require further input not availableto the transformer 230. Responsive to this determination, analysisengine 242 may indicate that the object is manual code 244C.

In further detail of some of the embodiments of automated systems andmethods, an object of a source installation may have elements capable ofbeing upgraded, transformed, or converted to a language and syntax of atarget installation in a manner essentially independent of additionaluser, developer input, or other external control. These elements may bereferred to as automatic code, or automatic elements. In otherembodiments, an object may have elements that are incapable of beingupgraded, transformed, or converted to a language and syntax of a targetinstallation in a manner essentially independent of additional user,developer input, or other external control. These elements may bereferred to as manual code, or manual elements. In some embodiments, anobject may have a combination of both automatic elements and manualelements. In these embodiments, the ratio of elements that are capableof upgrade to elements in the object may used to determine an automationvalue for the object. In further embodiments, the automation value maybe compared to one or more thresholds. For example, if the automationvalue is equal to or less than a first threshold, the object may becategorized as manual. If the automation value is equal to or greaterthan a second threshold, the object may be categorized as automatic. Ifthe automation value is greater than the first threshold, but less thanthe second threshold, the object may be categorized as semi-automatic.In some embodiments, the first threshold may be set at zero, such thatan object may be categorized as manual only if it has no elements thatare capable of upgrade. In other embodiments, the second threshold maybe set at 1, such that an object may be categorized as automatic only ifit has no elements that are incapable of upgrade.

In a further embodiment, analysis engine 242 may create a meta-modelrepresentative of one or more objects of source installation 220. Themeta-model, in some embodiments, may be a syntax tree or abstract syntaxtree, and may represent relationships between the one or more objects ofthe source installation 220. In further embodiments, the meta-model maybe presented to a user in either a textual or graphical format. Inadditional embodiments, the meta-model may contain links tocorresponding source code of the one or more objects. In suchembodiments, an element in the meta-model may maintain or include areference to the original source file and line number. In furtherembodiments, the meta-model may also comprise a mapping of elements toobjects. The meta-model, in many embodiments, is a generic structure ofnodes, representing objects, and connectors, representing relationshipsbetween objects. In such embodiments, the meta-model has no syntaxitself and does not correspond to a specific language. In additionalembodiments, the meta-model may be used for processing and transformingobjects of the source installation into objects usable by the targetinstallation by finding and replacing patterns of connections. In someembodiments, the meta-model may map mutual relationships between objectsand characterize relationships as static or dynamic. In suchembodiments, a dynamic relationship between objects may change duringruntime. For example, a first object may depend alternately on a secondobject or a third object, responsive to an indicator within a fourthobject. When the indicator within the fourth object changes, the firstobject's dependency likewise changes. In other embodiments, themeta-model may map the relationship of objects to other system entities,such as data elements, operating system programs, system applicationprograms, transactions, environment settings, etc.

In some embodiments, analysis engine 242 may further comprise functionsfor inserting comments into source code of an object. These comments mayindicate suggested modifications to the object or potential errors orwarnings if the object is not further modified. For example, asdiscussed above, an object classified as semi-automatic code 244B mayrequire explicit identification of a working directory on the targetinstallation 224 that does not correspond to a directory existing onsource installation 220. Accordingly, analysis agent may add a commentto source code of the object indicating that a user should add explicitidentification of a working directory.

Analysis agent 242 may also, in some embodiments, comprise functions orexecutable instructions for generating a report and/or presenting thereport to a user. In these embodiments, the report may include analysisof ratios of automatic code, semi-automatic code, and manual code244A-244C, and may include descriptions of objects, likelihood of errorswhen transforming objects, estimated time and/or cost to transformobjects, and may include graphs, charts, and/or text. The report mayalso include a graphical or textual representation of the meta-model.

In additional embodiments, analysis agent 242 may be configured by auser with analysis rules. In these embodiments, analysis rules may beused to ensure that relevant information of interest to the user will beanalyzed while increasing efficiency of analysis by ignoring otherinformation. For example, rules may be set to allow analysis of justcompliant or non-compliant objects, rather than both sets of objects. Insome embodiments, rules may be selected to allow or disallow analysis ofobjects with unicode violations; analysis of objects that must changewith a transformation; analysis of obsoleted objects; analysis ofstatistics relating to the transformation, such as time and/or cost; andanalysis of transformations in specified languages, such as ABAP orJava. As referred to herein, unicode may be source code that complieswith syntax and language rules of the target installation. Althoughreferred to as unicode, it does not designate a specific embodiment ofunicode, such as the unicode standard for text. Rather, unicode maysimply refer to a language utilized by a target or source installation,such as Java, Python, Perl, PHP, or any other type and form of computinglanguage. In additional embodiments, analysis rules may be configured todetermine elements in the meta-model that match customer-definedcharacteristics, such as invocation of customer programs, use of text,specified modification dates, or any other type and form of informationrelating to or associated with an element.

In some embodiments, the analysis agent 242 may be used outside of atransformation context, to analyze custom code for objects in a sourceinstallation as they are being written. For example, the analysis agentmay be used to measure whether coding standards are being followed, bydetermining if an object may be classified as automatic code 244A fortransformation to a hypothetical target installation 224 that isidentical to source installation 220. A determination that the object issemi-automatic code 244B or manual code 244C may indicate thatadditional data should be added to the object, such as full path namesto directories or explicit indication of ASCII or binary data in astring.

In some embodiments, analysis engine 242 may be configured to detectobject clones. An object clone may be objects that are similar to eachother or similar to standard objects of the system provided by theapplication manufacturer. For example, one developer may create anobject, such as a current invoices database, with links to customer andsales databases, and another developer may create a similar currentinvoices database with a different name, due to miscommunication or lackof communication. Although the names are different, the two databasesare substantially similar. Future edits or modifications to onedatabase, however, may result in behavior unexpected to a developer whoonly knows about the other database. Accordingly, an analysis engine maybe configured to detect these clones and flag them for removal,modification, transformation, or deletion. In one embodiment, clones maybe detected by comparing normalized lines of the object code to create acommonality rating. If the commonality rating exceeds a predeterminedthreshold, the objects may be considered clones. Similarly, in someembodiments, analysis engine 242 may be configured to detect multipleversions of an object and include only the latest version of the objectfor transformation.

As shown in FIG. 2C, transformer 230 may include a rule engine 246. Insome embodiments, this rule engine may be configured by a configurationagent 232 on configuration client 210. Rule engine 246 may comprise anapplication, process, agent, function, routine, logic, or any type andform of executable instructions for modifying semi-automatic code 244Bin accordance with rules selected or configured by a user usingconfiguration agent 232. For example, as described above, an objectclassified as semi-automatic code 244B may require explicitidentification of a working directory on the target installation 224that does not correspond to a directory existing on source installation220. A user may select or configure a rule that identifies a workingdirectory to be added to the source code of the object. Rules engine 246may then apply this rule and modify the object accordingly. In someembodiments, selecting or configuring rules may be referred to asparameterization.

Objects that are identified as automatic code 244A or have been modifiedby the rules engine 246 may, in some embodiments, be sent to conversionengine 248. Conversion engine 248 may comprise an application, process,agent, function, routine, logic, or any type and form of executableinstructions for transforming objects from a language associated with asource installation to a language associated with a target installation.In many embodiments, rules engine 246 and conversion engine 248 maycomprise similar functionality, with conversion engine 248 applyingpreset or predetermined rules. In such embodiments, conversion engine248 may comprise or be associated with a database or data structurecontaining predetermined rules for a language or languages to allowconversion. Unlike rules configured by configuration agent 232 andapplied by rules engine 246, rules applied by the conversion engine 248may, in some embodiments, be unmodifiable by a user. In someembodiments, rule engine 246 and conversion engine 248 may be combined,and may use a single rules database. In further embodiments,configuration agent 232 may be permitted to modify only a subset ofpredetermined rules in the rules database. One example of apredetermined rule may be a rule indicating that a comment tag from alanguage associated with a source installation (″) may be transformed ormodified to a comment tag from a language associated with a targetinstallation (#). Accordingly, in one embodiment of this example,conversion engine 248 may replace comment tags in a source code of anobject responsive to the rule.

As shown, transformer 230 may further comprise an upload engine 250.Upload engine 250, similar to download engine 240, may comprise hardwareand/or software components for uploading or transferring objects tobridge system 202. In some embodiments and as illustrated, upload engine250 may upload converted or transformed automatic code andsemi-automatic code 244A-244B, and may further upload unconverted manualcode 244C. In some embodiments, download engine 240 utilizes an RFC useraccount on solution manager 212 to upload objects, as discussed above.

Solution manager 212 may further comprise a unicode checker 252 and asyntax checker 238B, as shown in FIG. 2C. Unicode checker 252 maycomprise an application, process, agent, function, routine, logic, orany type and form of executable instructions for checking unicodecompliance of a transformed object. Similarly, syntax checker 238B maycomprise an application, process, agent, function, routine, logic, orany type and form of executable instructions for checking objectcompliance with syntax of a language associated with target installation224. In some embodiments, responsive to failure to comply with syntaxand/or unicode, solution manager 212 may present warnings or errors to auser. In other embodiments, responsive to failure to comply with syntaxand/or unicode, solution manager 212 may send the object back toanalysis agent for re-analysis and re-transformation.

Solution manager 212 may comprise a post-processing agent 254.Post-processing agent 254 may comprise an application, process, agent,function, routine, logic, or any type and form of executableinstructions for modifying an object, responsive to instructions from auser interacting with manual conversion agent 234, on configurationclient 210. In some embodiments, manual conversion agent 234 maycomprise an editing application allowing a user to modify source code ofan object, and may include features such as automatic recognition offunctions of a language; display of comments, such as those inserted byanalysis engine 242; and any other features useful to a developer.Although not shown, post-processing agent 254 and manual conversionagent 234 may comprise functionality for communicating over a network toallow a user interacting with configuration client 210 to modify anobject stored on bridge system 202. In an example embodiment, an objectcategorized as manual code 244C may be edited by a user via manualconversion agent 234 and post-processing agent 254 to repair unicode,functions, language features and/or syntax inconsistent with a languageassociated with target installation 224.

Although not illustrated in FIG. 2C, solution manager 212 or bridgesystem 202 may further comprise hardware and/or software components foruploading modified and/or post-processed objects to target installation224.

Referring now to FIG. 2D, illustrated is a block diagram of anembodiment of an analysis and transformation of a source installationinto a target installation. As described above, a source installation220 on source system 204 may be analyzed to create a meta-model 254. Asshown, meta-model 254 may comprise objects, or nodes, and links orstructure representative of dependencies and interactions between nodes.In some embodiments, the meta-model 254 may be transformed intotransformed meta-model 256, responsive to predetermined rules and/orconfigured rules. For example, in a language associated with sourceinstallation 220, a first node representing a function may be dependenton a second node representing an included library of the function.However, in a language associated with target installation 224, thefirst node representing the function may be dependent on both a secondand third node representing two included libraries. Alternately, thefirst node representing the function may, in the language associatedwith the target installation 224 have no dependencies due to explicitinclusion of code in the included library. Accordingly, in this exampleembodiment, transforming the meta-model 254 to transformed meta-model256 may comprise moving the first node representing the function to ahigher level within the abstract syntax tree.

Shown in FIG. 2E is a block diagram of an embodiment of a transformationprocess 258. In brief, an optimization engine 262 may applymodernization rules 260 to create an optimized abstract syntax tree 266.The optimized abstract syntax tree 266 may be further modified by aprogrammer 264 to create target code 270, associated with a targetlanguage syntax dictionary 268. Using test data 272, the target code maybe tested at 274.

Still referring to FIG. 2E and in more detail, modernization rules 260may include a language token or tokens 278, language syntax 282, andsemantic rules 284. A token 278 may be a structured element of code asdefined by the source language. For example, in the expression“print=(hello world);”, tokens 278 include “print”, “=”, “(”, “hello”, “”, “world”, “)”, and “;”. Determining tokens in source code is sometimesreferred to as tokenization or tokenizing, and may, in some embodiments,be performed by lexical analysis engine 280, and configured onoptimization engine 262. In some embodiments, language tokens 278 may becodified and, in some embodiments, stored in a database, dictionary, orother data structure.

Lexical analysis engine 280 may comprise an application, process, agent,function, routine, logic, or any type and form of executableinstructions for locating and interpreting language tokens within sourcecode of an object, as described above.

Language syntax 282 may be a representation of a grammar system within alanguage. A grammar may, in some embodiments, address location andmanipulation of tokens. For example, a token of a semi-colon, used inthe above example, may indicate in a language that it is the end of astatement. Tokens after the semi-colon may apply to the followingstatement, while those before the semi-colon apply to the precedingstatement. Language syntax 282 may, in some embodiments, be stored in adatabase, dictionary, or other data structure. In some embodiments,parser engine 284, configured on optimization engine 262 may use grammaridentified by language syntax 282 to parse tokens identified by lexicalanalysis engine 280. This may be referred to variously as syntacticanalysis, semantic parsing, parsing, or analyzing.

As shown, parser engine 284 may comprise an application, process, agent,function, routine, logic, or any type and form of executableinstructions for interpreting language tokens located in a source codewith language syntax 282 to create an abstract syntax tree 288, alsoreferred to above as a meta-model 254, by applying semantic rules 286.Semantic rules 286 may, in some embodiments, be stored in a database,dictionary or other data structure accessible to parser engine 284. Insome embodiments, parser engine 284 may comprise a top-down parser, suchas a recursive descent parser, or a Left-to-right, Leftmost derivation(LL) parser. In other embodiments, parser engine 284 may comprise abottom-up parser, such as a precedence parser, a bounded context (BC)parser, or a Left-to-right, Rightmost derivation (LR) parser.

Using any of the methods or functions described herein, programmer 264may convert abstract syntax tree 288 to an optimized abstract syntaxtree 266. Programmer 264 may, in some embodiments, comprise part or allof analysis agent 228, discussed in more detail above. Optimizedabstract syntax tree 266 may be a transformed meta-model 256, discussedabove. In some embodiments, optimization of an abstract syntax tree 266may be performed responsive to semantic rules and language syntaxassociated with a target language syntax dictionary 268. Objects of asource installation may be transformed to target code 270, responsive todifferences between the optimized abstract syntax tree 266 and abstractsyntax tree 288.

In some embodiments, test data 272 may be applied to target code 270 fortesting purposes 274. In further embodiments, testing may be performedby a user, while in other embodiments, testing may be performed by aservice or application identifying errors such as buffer overruns,unescaped loops, and other programming errors.

Shown in FIGS. 3A-B is a flow chart, split across two figures forclarity, illustrating an embodiment of a method 302 of analyzing andtransforming an application from a source installation to a targetinstallation. In brief, at step 304, a snapshot is taken of a sourceinstallation. At step 306, a determination is made as to whether thesource installation may be upgraded. If the source installation cannotbe upgraded, the method exits and may, in some embodiments, return anerror or display further instructions. If the source installation may beupgraded, then at step 308, the project is defined and configured. Atstep 310, an object may be downloaded from the source installation. Atstep 312, an identification of the object may be made to determine if ithas been modified from a predetermined state. In some embodiments notillustrated, responsive to a determination that the object has not beenmodified, the object may be discarded, and the method may move to step318, described below. If the object has been modified, then at step 314,the object may be parsed into a set of elements. At step 316, ameta-model may be generated representing the modified object. At step318, a determination may be made as to whether more objects exist in thesource installation. If so, steps 310-318 may be repeated. In someembodiments, repetition of step 316 may comprise modifying a generatedmeta-model to include representations of each additional modified objectparsed during repetitions of step 314.

At step 318, analysis rules may be applied to each element in themeta-model. At step 320, a determination may be made as to thetransformation capability of each object. At step 322, a report may begenerated and, in some embodiments, displayed to a user. At step 324,the user may customize analysis rules. If analysis rules have beencustomized, then steps 318-324 may be repeated. If analysis rules arenot customized at step 324, then at step 326, the meta-model may betransferred to a transformer, discussed above. At step 328,transformation rules may be applied to the meta-model to create atransformed meta-model. At step 330, an object may be modified togenerate a transformed object, responsive to dependencies and rulesassociated with the transformed meta-model. At step 332, a determinationmay be made as to whether more objects exist. If so, steps 330 and 332may be repeated. If not, then at step 334, a comparison report may begenerated comparing transformed objects with their untransformed states.At step 336, a user may customize transformation rules. If the rules arecustomized, then steps 328-336 may be repeated. At step 338, thesnapshot taken at step 304 may be compared with a current state of thesource installation. If the source installation has changed, then steps304-338 may be repeated.

At step 340, transformed objects may be uploaded to the targetinstallation. At step 342, the target installation may bepost-processed, which may comprise making additional manual changes toobjects uploaded to the target installation. At step 344, the targetinstallation may be compiled and/or tested.

Still referring to FIG. 3A-B and in more detail, at step 304, a snapshotmay be taken of a source installation. As described above, in someembodiments, taking a snapshot may comprise storing a copy of one ormore objects of a source installation as they exist at a certain time.In further embodiments, only part of the source installation may besnapshotted. For example, in one such embodiment, only customized ormodified objects of the source installation may be snapshotted, to saveanalyzing unnecessary elements.

At step 306, in some embodiments, a determination may be made whetherthe source installation may be upgraded. For example, in one suchembodiment, the source installation may already have been upgraded tothe same version as the target installation, and thus not requireupgrading. In some embodiments, the source installation and targetinstallation may not be compatible for an upgrade. In some embodiments,the system determines the number of changes, issues or non-compliancyexceed a predetermined threshold for upgrading to the target system.

At step 308, the project may be defined and configured. In someembodiments, defining and configuring the project may comprise selectinga version and/or language for a target installation. In additionalembodiments, configuring the project may comprise installing andconfiguring a target installation in a default or predetermined state,lacking customized objects. In a further embodiment, configuring theproject may comprise setting up RFC, Dialog, and Tool user accounts, asdiscussed above.

At step 310, an object may be downloaded from a source installation,using any of the methods and systems described herein, such as acollection agent and a collection plugin. At step 312, the object may beidentified as modified from a predetermined state. In an alternateembodiment not shown, steps 310 and 312 may be reversed, such thatobjects are identified as modified before they are downloaded. Such anembodiment may allow the system to avoid downloading unmodified objects,as discussed above. In some embodiments, identifying an object modifiedfrom a predetermined state may comprise identifying an object that doesnot exist in a source installation. For example, a custom database maynot exist in a default source installation, and accordingly may beconsidered to be a modified object.

At step 314, the object may be parsed into a set of elements, using anyof the methods and systems described herein. For example, an objectsource code may be tokenized and parsed to determine elements andrelationships between elements.

At step 316, a meta-model may be created and/or modified to include theelements and relationships identified at step 314, using any of themethods and systems described above. For example, creating themeta-model may comprise creating an abstract syntax tree representativeof the elements and their interrelationships. The system may generate ameta-model for all the elements of the source installation. In someembodiments, the system may generate a meta-model for a portion ofelements of the source installation, such as the elements identified aschanged from the predetermined state.

At step 318, a determination may be made as to whether more objectsand/or modified objects exist in the source installation, and if so,steps 310-318 may be repeated. In some embodiments, this determinationmay be made by comparing the number of nodes in the meta-model with thenumber of identified objects in the source installation snapshot. Inother embodiments, this determination may be made by failing to locatean additional object or modified object that has not yet been downloadedand parsed.

At step 318, analysis rules may be applied to each element in themeta-model. At step 320, a transformation capability may be determinedfor each object. For example, an object may be classified as automaticcode, semi-automatic code, or manual code, as described above. At step322, a report may be generated. In some embodiments, applying analysisrules comprises performing the functions described above in connectionwith the analysis client and/or analysis engine. In additionalembodiments, generating a report comprises analyzing statistics of thetransformation capability of each object, such as determining ratios ofautomatic, semi-automatic, and manual code, and determining cost and/ortime to perform upgrades, as described above.

At step 324, analysis rules may be customized, and steps 318-324repeated. For example, responsive to determining that upgrading may betoo costly due to a large number of objects to be transformed, a usermay modify analysis rules to exclude a portion of the objects. Steps318-324 may be repeated in some embodiments until the user is satisfiedwith the outcome indicated by the generated report.

At step 326, the meta-model may be transferred to the transformer. Insome embodiments, transferring the model may comprise transmitting themodel to the transformer, while in other embodiments, transferring themodel may comprise the analysis client instructing the transformer toaccess the model on a shared memory element.

At step 328, the transformer may apply transformation rules to themeta-model to generate a transformed meta-model, using any of thesystems and methods discussed herein. In one embodiment, applyingtransformation rules may comprise locating a pattern in the meta-modelcorresponding to an entry in a transformation rule database. In afurther embodiment, applying transformation rules may comprise modifyingan abstract syntax tree according to a rule associated with an entry ina transformation rule database. For example, in one such embodiment, thetransformer may determine that a first element is dependent on a secondelement. The transformer may further determine that the second elementis a function call, such as a WRITE instruction. The transformer maylocate a rule in the rule database associated with target installationlanguage matching a first element dependent on a WRITE instruction, andapply the rule to modify the WRITE instruction to a WRITE TOinstruction.

At step 330, in some embodiments, the transformer may generate atransformed object according to the transformed meta-model. In someembodiments, generating a transformed object comprises modifying asource object. In other embodiments, generating a transformed objectcomprises generating a new object. In one embodiment, a transformedobject may be generated responsive to transformation rules, discussedabove. For example, an object including code representing a WRITEinstruction, as discussed at step 328, may be modified to include coderepresenting a WRITE TO instruction. Further changes may be maderesponsive to transformation rules and/or the transformed meta-model.For example, a first object dependent on a second object in the originalmeta-model may be dependent on a third and fourth object in thetransformed meta-model. Accordingly, at step 330, the transformer mayreplace, in source code of the first object, references to the secondobject with references to the third and/or fourth object. In an exampleof one such embodiment, in a source installation, a first objectcomprising a human resources database, may be dependent on anotherobject comprising an organizational hierarchy. However, in thetransformed meta-model, the human resources database may furthercomprise organizational hierarchy and not be dependent on a secondobject. Accordingly, in this example embodiment, the transformer maymodify the first object to further comprise fields indicating levels andinterconnections previously described in object comprising theorganizational hierarchy. In further embodiments, generating atransformed object may comprise generating an object that possessesdesired characteristics defined by the transformation rules, such asbeing free of syntax violations and/or naming convention errors, or anyother type of characteristic of a source code that may be desired by auser.

At step 332, a determination may be made if more objects exist, usingsimilar methods to those described above at step 318. If so, steps330-332 may be repeated.

At step 334, a comparison report may be generated. In one embodiment, acomparison report comprises a comparison of untransformed elementsand/or objects and transformed elements and/or objects. In a furtherembodiment, the comparison report may be displayed or presented to auser. For example, in an embodiment of the example discussed above atstep 330, a report may be generated showing (a) the first objectcomprising the human resources database with source code showingdependency on the second object comprising the organizational hierarchy;and (b) the first object comprising the human resources database withsource code showing no dependency on the second object, but ratherincluding additional data representing the hierarchical levels andinterconnections.

At step 336, the user may customize the transformation rules. In someembodiments, this may be done for increasing efficiency, adjusting forundesired behavior, or any other reason. Referring to the examplediscussed above at step 334, a user may decide that it is preferable tomaintain the separate human resources database and organizationalhierarchy, and may adjust the transformation rules to exclude or disablethis transformation. In another example, an organization may beexpanding simultaneously with upgrading, and may be adding additionalmanufacturing locations. In such an example, a user may modify thetransformation rules to incorporate the additional resources for eachnew manufacturing location, such as additional inventory databases,additional shipping locations, or any other type and form of resource orobject. In some embodiments, if the user has customized or modified thetransformation rules, steps 328-336 may be repeated.

At step 338, the analysis client may determine if the sourceinstallation has changed since the snapshot was taken. This could occur,for example, if analysis, transformation, and customization have taken asignificant amount of time. If so, steps 304-338 may be repeated. Insome embodiments, repeating steps 304-338 may comprise repeating steps304-338 only on objects that have been modified in the sourceinstallation since the previous snapshot. These embodiments may reduceanalysis, transformation, and customization time greatly, as onlyobjects that have changed will need to be re-analyzed and transformed.In further embodiments, transformed objects that have not changed in thesource installation may be stored on a storage element until thedetermination at step 338 indicates that no further changes haveoccurred in the source installation.

Responsive to no further changes having occurred in the sourceinstallation since the previous snapshot was taken, at step 340, theobject transformations may be applied to the target installation. Insome embodiments, applying the transformations may comprise uploading ortransmitting transformed elements and/or objects to the targetinstallation, using any of the methods or systems discussed herein.

At step 342, the target installation may be post-processed. In someembodiments, post-processing the target installation may compriseediting manual or semi-automatic code, as discussed above. In additionalembodiments, post-processing the target installation may compriseoptimizing the installation. For example, optimization may includecompressing the installation, removing unnecessary comments and/or code,cleaning up or removing unused variables, or any other type and form ofsource code optimization.

At step 344, the target installation may be tested. In some embodiments,step 344 may further comprise compiling the target installation. Inother embodiments, the target installation does not require compiling,for example, if all objects are XML, objects. In some embodiments,testing the target installation comprises installing test data to thetarget installation, performing modifications to objects and databases,and verifying expected results. In some embodiments, responsive toerrors during testing, one or more steps of method 302 may be repeated,for example steps 328-344.

Although discussed in terms of source installations and targetinstallations, in many implementations, transformation or upgrading maybe done on a portion of an installation, such as a module or othersubset of a system. For example, in one implementation, a company maybegin with a clean target installation of a new version of a system, andtransform and migrate a subset of objects or code from a sourceinstallation, discarding or not transforming obsolete code modules orobjects. This may be done periodically or during an upgrade to removeunused portions of code, for example.

As discussed above, these methods of using a cloud service forapplication transformation provide both flexibility in deployment andadvantages in parallel and concurrent processing and transformation ofobjects of the application. This may reduce the need for customers ofthe application transformation service to supply local infrastructure,and allow the service to support the needs of multiple customerssimultaneously.

C. Systems and Methods for Automatically Retrofitting Customized CodeObjects During Transformation from a Source Installation to a TargetInstallation

As discussed above, in many instances, new objects may be created orobjects modified on the online or production system while thedevelopment system is being upgraded. Simply copying the upgradeddevelopment system to the production system when complete would deletethese new objects or modifications. Accordingly, the modifications ornew objects may need to be retrofitted, or propagated to the developmentsystem and upgraded or transformed for compatibility with the newsoftware, prior to placing the system online.

FIG. 4A is an illustration of examples of timelines 400 of a sourceinstallation 220 and target installation 224 during upgrade, accordingto one implementation. As shown, at some initial starting point, atarget installation 224 may be created from a source installation 220,such as by copying the target installation 224 to a development serveror “offline” server for transformation. In this context, “offline” and“online” refer not to whether or not the servers are connected to anetwork (both offline and online servers typically will remain connectedto the network), but whether the installation is being used for normalprocessing operations by clients (e.g. “online”) or is being preparedfor or being transformed and/or tested prior to client use (e.g.“offline”).

Once copied and/or the target installation 224 is created, the sourceinstallation 220 and target installation 224 are identical orsynchronized, at synchronization point 402A. The target installation maythen be upgraded, e.g. analyzed and transformed as discussed above,during time period 404. Upgrading the installation may compriseperforming any of the steps or utilizing any of the systems discussedabove, such as those in section B. As discussed above, upgrading theinstallation may be performed on a subset or portion of the sourceinstallation, with obsolete code ignored or removed duringtransformation.

While the target installation is being upgraded, users of the onlinesource installation 220 may still be performing processing, modifyingobjects, creating new objects, etc., resulting in one or moremodifications to the source installation 406. Without retrofitting thesemodifications to the target installation 224, the source and targetinstallations will remain unsynchronized. Furthermore, transformationsand modifications made to the offline installation may conflict withmodifications of the online installation, causing conflicts if the twosystems are merged without further processing.

Once upgrading is complete, at 408, the modifications may be retrofittedor merged to the target installation. In some implementations, themodifications may be simple changes to data that may be directlyimported or copied into the target installation 224. In otherimplementations, the modifications may include new or modified codeobjects that have version-specific syntax or refer to other objects withversion-specific syntax. If such modifications are simply imported intothe target installation 224, they may cause errors and instability.Accordingly, during time period 410, the modifications may betransformed and applied to the target installation 224 using syntax andrelationships appropriate to the post-transformation version of theobjects.

As discussed above, in some implementations, an analysis agent 228 mayanalyze and parse code objects during transformation. For objects thatare identified as automatic code 244A, predetermined conversion rulesmay be applied. For objects identified as semi-automatic code 244B, auser may provide conversion rules via a configuration agent 232 andrules engine 246, for execution by a conversion engine 248. For objectsidentified as manual code 244C, a user may provide manual conversioninstructions for execution by a post-processing agent 254. In someimplementations, the predetermined conversion rules, user-set conversionrules, and manual conversion instructions maybe retained (e.g. in adatabase, XML file, or similar data structure) and may be applied to themodified objects during period 410. For example, during transformation,a data object with an invalid name may be renamed by the user via auser-set conversion rule. Objects with references to the invalid namemay be modified by the transformer 230 to refer to the newly set validname. If a new or modified object 406 includes a reference to theinvalid name, the transfer 230 may apply the previously establishedconversion rule during period 410 to automatically upgrade or retrofitthe object 406. Thus, the same transformations may be applied to objectscopied to the target installation 224 at synchronization point 402A asto objects 406 created or modified during period 404 and merged with thetarget installation at time 408.

This process of merger and upgrading 408-410 may be repeated iterativelyin some implementations until no more modifications have been made tothe source installation 220 that have not been transformed and copiedinto the target installation and the installations 220, 224 are againsynchronized at synchronization point 402B.

In some implementations, some new or modified objects may be merged intothe target installation directly. For example, many newly createdobjects may not directly conflict with previously existent objects.However, modified objects may include modifications within similarportions of code that was upgraded. For example, as discussed above,transformation rules may be applied to convert a database name from aname that has invalid syntax in a new version of the software to a validname (e.g. from “invalid_name” to “valid_name”). If, during time period404, the user modifies the name of the database in the sourceinstallation 220 to a new name (e.g. “valid_name2”), it may not beimmediately apparent whether the target installation 224 should retainthe transformed name (“valid_name”) or the newly modified and valid name(“valid_name2”). This may create a conflict where either modificationmay be performed, but not both. Similarly, the user may modify thedatabase name to another invalid name (e.g. “invalid_name2”), and thetransformation rules (e.g. “remap references from ‘invalid_name’ to‘valid_name’”) may fail when automatically applied to the modifieddatabase at step 410. In another example, a first function from thesource installation 220, such as an if-then loop, may be converted to asecond function during upgrading of the target installation 224, such asa while loop. While the upgrade is being performed, a user may modifythe code to change the function to a select-from command, deleting theloop. During merger, this may create another conflict, as it may not beclear whether the code should include the while loop or select-fromcommand. Such conflicts may be identified through changes made toparticular lines of code by the transformer during upgrade and the userduring period 404, through changes to object names or identifiers, orother such conflicts. In some implementations, conflicts may be taggedby severity or type. For example, conflicts that appear within commentfields (e.g. the transformed object includes a comment, and the usermodified the comment during period 404), the conflict may be tagged as a“comment-conflict” and may be given a low priority in someimplementations. Conflicts in code functions or objects may be tagged as“conflicts” and may be given a higher priority in some implementations.In a further implementation, the system may identify the number ofconflicts and their priority and may present to the user anidentification of the number or percentage of high priority conflictsand low priority conflicts, and may, in some implementations, provide anestimated time or cost to manually resolve the conflicts. Such anestimated time or cost may be a function of the number of conflicts andtheir priority (e.g. high priority conflicts may take more time toresolve than low priority conflicts, which may even be ignored in someimplementations).

FIG. 4B is a block diagram of an implementation of a system forautomated retrofitting of customized code objects. As shown, manyimplementations utilize components discussed above, such as a bridgesystem 202, source system 204, target system 206, and analyzer client208; source installation 220 and target installation 224; RFC Users216A-216C; solution manager 212; analysis agent 228; and transformer230. Although not shown, in many implementations, other componentsillustrated in FIGS. 2A-2C and discussed above may be included.

In some implementations, a solution manager 212 of a bridge system 202may comprise a retrofit engine 420. Retrofit engine 420 may comprise anapplication, service, server, daemon, routine, or other executable logicfor performing iterative merge and upgrading of new or modified objectsand code from a source installation to a target installation, orretrofitting modified or new objects and code into the targetinstallation. Retrofit engine 420 may include a monitor routine,service, or daemon monitoring changes to a source system 204 and/orsource installation 220, referred to generally as a monitor. In someimplementations, the monitor may communicate via an RFC user account216B with source installation 220 to identify and record details ofchanges to objects and code of the source installation 220.

In some implementations, an analysis agent 228 of an analyzer client 208may include a conflict resolution engine 422. Conflict resolution engine422 may comprise an application, server, service, daemon, routine, orother executable logic for identifying and analyzing modified objectsand code of a source installation and comparing changes to the objectsand code and changes to corresponding objects and code duringtransformation of a target installation 224 on a target system 206. Suchcomparisons may be performed on an object, entity, or line-by-line oreven character-by-character code level, referred to generally herein asentities. As such entities may comprise objects, functions, routines,subroutines, variables, data dictionaries or entries withindictionaries, databases or entries within databases, paths, accounts,configurations (such as print formatting, display configurations,account configurations, etc.), or any other type and form of data thatmay be modified by users or administrators and/or may be modified duringupgrading of an installation of a system. In some implementations, asdiscussed above, conflict resolution engine 422 may classify conflicts,and/or identify or generate priority identifiers for conflicts. Theconflict resolution engine 422 may identify conflicts between differentversions of changed objects and codes. In some implementations, theconflict resolution engine 422 may analyze whether the changes are tomanual, semi-automatic, or automatic code, as discussed above. In afurther implementation, conflict priority may be based on whether thechanges are to manual, semi-automatic, or automatic code. In anotherimplementation, conflict priority may be based on how different themodified objects or code are, such as a factor based on the number ofdifferent characters or entities in the changed versions. This may allowfor lower priority identification of conflicts in cases where a usermodifies an object in the same or a similar way to how the transformermodified the object in the target installation.

Once modified or new objects and code are identified by the monitor,retrofit engine 420 may store identifications of the modified or newobjects or code in a version control database 424. Version controldatabase 424 may comprise a data file, flat file, array, relationaldatabase, or any other type and form of data structure for identifyingobjects and code modified by users in a source installation 220; and foridentifying objects and code modified by a transformer 230 duringtransformation of a target installation 224. The database 424 mayinclude identifications of the changed objects or code, including names,paths, folders, directory structures, parent entity identifiers,locations, UIDs, or other such identifiers. In some implementations,these identifications may be used to identify and compare correspondingobjects or code between the target installation 224 and sourceinstallation 220. In other implementations, the database may includeidentifications of a previous version of the object or code, which maybe used for identifying corresponding or related objects.

As discussed above, transformer 230 may apply various rules duringtransformation of objects and code, including predetermined rules, rulesset by a user for conversion of semi-automatic code, and manualtransformation instructions. These rules may be stored in a rule andobject database 426, which may comprise a data file, flat file, array,relational database, XML file, or any other type and form of datastructure. The rules may be applied during transformation of the targetinstallation 224, and may also be applied to new and modified objects ofthe source installation 220 identified by retrofit engine 420. In someimplementations, transformer 230 may apply the transformation rules andinstructions to modified code and objects before the conflict resolutionengine 422 compares the resulting output to the target installation. Inother implementations, conflict resolution engine 422 may compare theobjects before transformer 230 applies conversion rules, though in someimplementations, this may result in false negatives or positives ifchanges to objects result in further changes to child objects that arenot identified by the conflict resolution engine 422 as potentiallyconflicted.

FIG. 4C is a flow chart of an implementation of a method for automatedretrofitting of customized code objects. At step 450, code and objectsmay be copied from a source installation to a target installation, or atarget installation may be prepared for transfer. In someimplementations, the target installation may comprise a newinstallation, such as a new version of an ERP software suite. In otherimplementations, the target installation may comprise an upgrade of aprevious version of the suite. At step 452, the objects and code may beupgraded. Although referred to as copying and upgrading objects, in manyimplementations, steps 450 and 452 may include reading objects from asource installation, parsing and analyzing the objects by a bridgesystem and/or analyzer client 208, transforming the objects by atransformer 230, post-processing the objects by a bridge system, and/orcopying the transformed objects into the target installation.Accordingly, steps 450-452 may comprise any of the analysis,transformation, and installation processes discussed above, and step 452may be part of step 450, in some implementations. As discussed above, insome implementations, the analyzer client 208 may retain a record ofobjects or code transformed during the upgrade process and the rules orinstructions, including user-configured rules and instructions, used tomodify the objects or code in a rule and object database 426 and/orversion control database 424.

At step 454, a solution manager or retrofit engine may determine ifchanges have been made to the source installation. Changes may includenew objects or code, modified objects or code, or renamed, moved, orotherwise modified objects or code. The solution manager or retrofit maydetermine if changes have occurred by monitoring for write commands orupdates to a database or repository, intercepting or hooking writecommands, periodically comparing a repository to a previously knownstate, or otherwise monitoring the source installation for changes.

If there are no changes, then at step 456, the target installation maybe deployed, as discussed above. In some implementations, the targetsystem may be placed online, while in other implementations, the targetinstallation may be copied to the source system. The target installationmay accordingly be deployed via any method, such as those discussedabove.

If there are changes made to the source installation, such as new ormodified objects or code, then at step 458, the retrofit engine mayselect a first modified or new object or code section and determinewhether the change is in the same location as an upgrade to code orobjects performed at step 452. In some implementations, the retrofitengine may determine that the change is in the same location on a lineby line basis, character by character basis, function by function basis,or any other measurement. In other implementations, the retrofit enginemay determine that the change is in the same location based on themodified object including a name, identifier, function, or other entitymodified by the transformer during upgrade of objects 452. In someimplementations, the retrofit engine may retrieve identifiers and/orlocations of objects modified during upgrading and identified in a ruleand object database 426 or version control database 424, and may comparethe locations or identifiers to those of modified objects detected bythe retrofit engine.

If the modifications are to a different object or location of code, thenat step 460, the modified object or code may be merged or copied intothe target installation, and at step 462, the modified object or codemay be upgraded. As with steps 450-452, merging and upgrading the codeor object may include reading modified objects from the sourceinstallation, parsing and analyzing the modified objects by a bridgesystem and/or analyzer client 208, transforming the modified objects bya transformer 230, post-processing the modified objects by a bridgesystem, and/or copying the transformed objects into the targetinstallation. Accordingly, steps 460-462 may comprise any of theanalysis, transformation, and installation processes discussed above,and step 462 may be part of step 460, in some implementations.

If the modifications are to code or objects that were upgraded at step452, then at step 464, the modified object or code and the correspondingupgraded object or code (and/or their location within a larger object)may be marked as conflicted. Marking the object or code as conflictedmay comprise setting a flag or predetermined bit in a header of theobject, identifying the object in a conflict file or version controldatabase, or any other such function. At step 466, in someimplementations, the conflicted objects or code may be classified bypriority and/or type (e.g. comment conflicts, object conflicts,reference conflicts, etc.; and low, medium, or high priority). In someimplementations, the priority may be based on object type (e.g. lowpriority for comment conflicts), or may be based on the type of code(e.g. automatic code being low priority, semi-automatic code beingmedium priority, and manual code being high priority, or any other suchsystem). As with conflict tags, the priority may be identified via aflag or predetermined bit or bits in a header, or identified in aconflict file or version control database. In some implementations,objects or code identified as conflicted may be merged and upgraded asdiscussed above at steps 460-462. A user may then subsequently reviewthe conflicted objects as upgraded to select which version to retain andwhich to remove. In other implementations, this step may be skipped. Instill other implementations, only conflicted objects or code identifiedas semi-automatic or automatic may be merged and upgraded, while thoseidentified as manual may be left un-upgraded for review.

In some implementations, objects identified as conflicted may be mergedwithout causing error. For example, given a first object with anon-unicode compliant name, during transformation of the system, theobject may be modified by they system to have a compliant name. Duringthis period, if a user modifies the name of the object on the sourcesystem to a different compliant name, then the transformation of theearlier name may be irrelevant. Although conflicted, the user'smodification should take precedent and be merged into the target system.In other implementations, user modifications may include deletingobjects or code or other entities from the source installation that weresubsequently transformed, rendering the transformation moot. As aresult, the entity may be deleted from the target installation toresolve the conflict. The retrofit engine or conflict resolution enginemay determine whether a transformation is moot or irrelevant in suchcases by determining whether the transformation that was performed onthe pre-modified entity would have been performed on the post-modifiedentity: if not, then the transformation may be irrelevant and themodified entity may be merged into the target installation and thetransformed entity discarded to resolve the conflict. In anotherimplementation, a user modification may be to a portion of a codeelement different from a portion transformed by the retrofit engine. Forexample, a report query may be transformed to be compatible withfunctions of a new version of the software, and a user may modify avariable of the query (e.g. to include a new variable or change avariable name). Although operating on the same query, the twomodifications may not be in conflict. The conflict resolution engine mayidentify such non-conflicts by comparing transformations made to theoriginal entity and transformations made to the user-modified version ofthe entity: if the transformations are identical (e.g. an intersectionbetween the transformed objects includes all of the transformed code),and differences only exist in portions of the code not modified by thetransformer, then the entities may be merged (or the user-modifiedentity transformed and imported to replace the original entity) toresolve the conflict.

At step 468, the retrofit engine may determine if there are additionalobjects or code that have been modified in the interim. If so, steps458-468 may be repeated. In some implementations, the retrofit enginemay continue monitoring changes to the source installation duringmerging and upgrading of modifications at steps 458-468, to detect anysubsequent changes or modifications prior to deploying the targetinstallation. In such implementations, steps 458-468 may be repeatediteratively until all objects have been upgraded and merged into thesystem, and/or classified as conflicted and marked for review.

As discussed above, once all objects have been upgraded and/or marked,at step 456, the target installation may be deployed. In someimplementations, prior to deployment, an identification of conflictedobjects or code may be presented to the user for review, and the usermay select which version to retain and which to delete. For example,FIG. 4D is an illustration of a user interface or report 480 for animplementation of automated retrofitting of customized code objects. Asshown, the system may display objects or code from a source installation220. The system may also display objects or code from a targetinstallation 224, post-upgrading and transformation. As shown, in someimplementations, a user may add new code to a source installation 220,may add new comments to a target installation 224, and/or vice versa.Similarly, some objects from the source installation may be updated ortransformed to updated code in the target installation.

In some implementations, the retrofit engine may merge the code orobjects from each installation into a merged report 482, includingfeatures from each installation with duplicate entries removed. Theretrofit engine may add coloring or shading 488, and lines or arrows484, 468 indicating a source and destination of a code snippet. Theshading may be different for code conflicts that are low priority, suchas comment conflicts; than for code conflicts that are high priority,such as function conflicts or reference conflicts. Accordingly, a usermay easily visually identify code or object conflicts and select whichversion to retain.

Thus, the systems and methods discussed herein provide for automaticretrofitting of modified or updated code or objects duringtransformation of a source installation to a target installation. In afirst aspect, the present disclosure is directed to a method forautomated retrofitting of customized code objects. The method includestransforming, by an analyzer client executed by a processor of a clientdevice, objects of a source installation into a target installation,during a first time period. The method also includes detecting, by aretrofit engine, a first object of the source installation modifiedduring the first time period. The method further includes determining,by the retrofit engine, that the modifications to the first object donot involve the same entities as transformed portions of a correspondingobject of the target installation. The method further includes,responsive to the determination, merging the modified first object, bythe retrofit engine, with the target installation.

In some implementations, merging the modified first object with thetarget installation further comprises applying one or moretransformation rules applied by the analyzer client to the correspondingobject of the target installation. In a further implementation, at leasta portion of the one or more transformation rules are set duringtransformation of the objects of the source installation to the targetinstallation. In some implementations, the method includes monitoringwrite commands of the source installation, by the retrofit engine.

In another aspect, the present disclosure is directed to a method forautomated retrofitting of customized code objects. The method includestransforming, by an analyzer client executed by a processor of a clientdevice, objects of a source installation into a target installation,during a first time period. The method also includes detecting, by aretrofit engine, a first object of the source installation modifiedduring the first time period. The method further includes determining,by the retrofit engine, that the modifications to the first objectinvolve the same entities as transformed portions of a correspondingobject of the target installation. The method also includes, responsiveto the determination, identifying the second object as conflicted, bythe retrofit engine.

In some implementations, the method includes setting a priority for theconflict based on a type of the first object. In other implementations,the method includes determining whether the first object comprisesautomatic, semi-automatic, or manual code. In a further implementation,the method includes transforming the first object by applying one ormore transformation rules applied by the analyzer client to thecorresponding object of the target installation, responsive to adetermination that the first object comprises automatic orsemi-automatic code. In another further implementation, the methodincludes setting a priority for the conflict based on the determination.In some implementations, the method includes generating a conflictreport identifying the modified first object of the source installationand the corresponding object of the target installation. In someimplementations, the method includes determining, by the retrofitengine, that the transformed portions of the corresponding object areidentical to corresponding portions of a transformed version of thefirst object; and responsive to the determination, merging thetransformed version of the first object and the corresponding object,and identifying the conflict as resolved, by the retrofit engine.

In still another aspect, the present disclosure is directed to a systemfor automated retrofitting of customized code objects. The systemincludes a bridge system, in communication with a source systemcomprising a source installation and a target system comprising a targetinstallation, the bridge system comprising a processor executing aretrofit engine. The system also includes an analyzer client, incommunication with the bridge system, comprising a processor executing atransformer. The transformer is configured to transform objects of asource installation into a target installation, during a first timeperiod. The retrofit engine is configured to: detect a first object ofthe source installation modified during the first time period, anddetermine that the modifications to the first object do not involve thesame entities as transformed portions of a corresponding object of thetarget installation. The transformer is further configured to merge themodified first object with the target installation, responsive to thedetermination.

In some implementations, merging the modified first object with thetarget installation further comprises applying one or moretransformation rules applied by the analyzer client to the correspondingobject of the target installation. In a further implementation, at leasta portion of the one or more transformation rules are set duringtransformation of the objects of the source installation to the targetinstallation.

In some implementations, the retrofit engine is further configured tomonitor write commands of the source installation. In anotherimplementation, merging the modified first object with the targetinstallation is performed during a second time period, and the retrofitengine is further configured to: detect a second object of the sourceinstallation modified during the second time period, determine that themodifications to the second object do involve the same entities astransformed portions of a second corresponding object of the targetinstallation, and responsive to the determination, identify the secondobject as conflicted. In a further implementation, the retrofit engineis further configured to set a priority for the conflict based on a typeof the second object. In another further implementation, the retrofitengine is further configured to determine whether the second objectcomprises automatic, semi-automatic, or manual code. In a still furtherimplementation, the transformer is further configured to transform thesecond object by applying one or more transformation rules applied bythe analyzer client to the second corresponding object of the targetinstallation, responsive to a determination that the second objectcomprises automatic or semi-automatic code. In another still furtherimplementation, the retrofit engine is further configured to set apriority for the conflict based on the determination. In someimplementations, the retrofit engine is further configured to generate aconflict report identifying the modified second object of the sourceinstallation and the second corresponding object of the targetinstallation. In some implementations, the retrofit engine is furtherconfigured to determine that the transformed portions of thecorresponding object are identical to corresponding portions of atransformed version of the first object; and responsive to thedetermination, merge the transformed version of the first object and thecorresponding object, and identify the conflict as resolved.

While various embodiments of the methods and systems have beendescribed, these embodiments are exemplary and in no way limit the scopeof the described methods or systems. Those having skill in the relevantart can effect changes to form and details of the described methods andsystems without departing from the broadest scope of the describedmethods and systems. Thus, the scope of the methods and systemsdescribed herein should not be limited by any of the exemplaryembodiments and should be defined in accordance with the accompanyingclaims and their equivalents.

What is claimed:
 1. A method for automated retrofitting of customizedcode objects, comprising: transforming, by an analyzer client executedby a processor of a client device, objects of a source installation intoa target installation, during a first time period; detecting, by aretrofit engine, a first object of the source installation modifiedduring the first time period; determining, by the retrofit engine, thatthe modifications to the first object do not involve the same entitiesas transformed portions of a corresponding object of the targetinstallation; and responsive to the determination, merging the modifiedfirst object, by the retrofit engine, with the target installation. 2.The method of claim 1, wherein merging the modified first object withthe target installation further comprises applying one or moretransformation rules applied by the analyzer client to the correspondingobject of the target installation.
 3. The method of claim 2, wherein atleast a portion of the one or more transformation rules are set duringtransformation of the objects of the source installation to the targetinstallation.
 4. The method of claim 1, wherein detecting the firstobject of the source installation modified during the first time periodfurther comprises monitoring write commands of the source installation,by the retrofit engine.
 5. A method for automated retrofitting ofcustomized code objects, comprising: transforming, by an analyzer clientexecuted by a processor of a client device, objects of a sourceinstallation into a target installation, during a first time period;detecting, by a retrofit engine, a first object of the sourceinstallation modified during the first time period; determining, by theretrofit engine, that the modifications to the first object involve thesame entities as transformed portions of a corresponding object of thetarget installation; and responsive to the determination, identifyingthe second object as conflicted, by the retrofit engine.
 6. The methodof claim 5, further comprising setting a priority for the conflict basedon a type of the first object.
 7. The method of claim 5, furthercomprising determining whether the first object comprises automatic,semi-automatic, or manual code.
 8. The method of claim 7, furthercomprising transforming the first object by applying one or moretransformation rules applied by the analyzer client to the correspondingobject of the target installation, responsive to a determination thatthe first object comprises automatic or semi-automatic code.
 9. Themethod of claim 7, further comprising setting a priority for theconflict based on the determination.
 10. The method of claim 5, furthercomprising generating a conflict report identifying the modified firstobject of the source installation and the corresponding object of thetarget installation.
 11. The method of claim 5, further comprising:determining, by the retrofit engine, that the transformed portions ofthe corresponding object are identical to corresponding portions of atransformed version of the first object; and responsive to thedetermination, merging the transformed version of the first object andthe corresponding object, and identifying the conflict as resolved, bythe retrofit engine.
 12. A system for automated retrofitting ofcustomized code objects, comprising: a bridge system, in communicationwith a source system comprising a source installation and a targetsystem comprising a target installation, the bridge system comprising aprocessor executing a retrofit engine; an analyzer client, incommunication with the bridge system, comprising a processor executing atransformer; wherein the transformer is configured to transform objectsof a source installation into a target installation, during a first timeperiod; wherein the retrofit engine is configured to: detect a firstobject of the source installation modified during the first time period,and determine that the modifications to the first object do not involvethe same entities as transformed portions of a corresponding object ofthe target installation; and wherein the transformer is furtherconfigured to merge the modified first object with the targetinstallation, responsive to the determination.
 13. The system of claim12, wherein merging the modified first object with the targetinstallation further comprises applying one or more transformation rulesapplied by the analyzer client to the corresponding object of the targetinstallation.
 14. The system of claim 13, wherein at least a portion ofthe one or more transformation rules are set during transformation ofthe objects of the source installation to the target installation. 15.The system of claim 12, wherein the retrofit engine is furtherconfigured to monitor write commands of the source installation.
 16. Thesystem of claim 12, wherein merging the modified first object with thetarget installation is performed during a second time period, andwherein the retrofit engine is further configured to: detect a secondobject of the source installation modified during the second timeperiod, determine that the modifications to the second object do involvethe same entities as transformed portions of a second correspondingobject of the target installation, and responsive to the determination,identify the second object as conflicted.
 17. The system of claim 16,wherein the retrofit engine is further configured to set a priority forthe conflict based on a type of the second object.
 18. The system ofclaim 16, wherein the retrofit engine is further configured to determinewhether the second object comprises automatic, semi-automatic, or manualcode.
 19. The system of claim 18, wherein the transformer is furtherconfigured to transform the second object by applying one or moretransformation rules applied by the analyzer client to the secondcorresponding object of the target installation, responsive to adetermination that the second object comprises automatic orsemi-automatic code.
 20. The system of claim 18, wherein the retrofitengine is further configured to set a priority for the conflict based onthe determination.
 21. The system of claim 16, wherein the retrofitengine is further configured to generate a conflict report identifyingthe modified second object of the source installation and the secondcorresponding object of the target installation.
 22. The system of claim16, wherein the retrofit engine is further configured to determine thatthe transformed portions of the corresponding object are identical tocorresponding portions of a transformed version of the first object; andresponsive to the determination, merge the transformed version of thefirst object and the corresponding object, and identify the conflict asresolved.